On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:56:48AM -0500, Jason Resch wrote:
> 
> I am in complete disagreement with Searle's assertion that
> consciousness is a physical property. 

I'm with you on this one. Searle's suggestion sound bizarre to me,
without further evidence to back it up.

  Where you and I might
> diverge in opinion is that I think something still burns in a
> simulated reality even if there are no observers within that reality
> to sense it.  It's the basic "If a tree falls in the woods.." idea.  I
> would say the simulation of the tree falling doesn't make a sound
> without an observer in the simulation to hear it, but I would say a
> tree still falls, in that simulation even without there being an
> interpreter at that level of simulation.  I am interested to know your
> opinion on this and how if at all it differs from mine.
> 

Whilst I probably do differ from you on this, I also think it is a
question without merit, similar to debating the number of angels on
the head of pin.

> Regards,
> 
> Jason
> 
> 
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics                              
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia                                http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to